We've revised the Home Page to include only the highly ranked articles (as determined by me) and given you links to all the current articles. Let us know how you like the new version.

A couple articles of note today.

ROOSEVELT: Sirota attempts to cast aspersions on recent research that shows how Roosevelt policies prolonged the Depression. His article is by no means seminal, but you might be interested in reading my criticism.

HEALTH CARE DEBATE: By far, the best article of the day relates to Obama's health care solutions, plural because several Democrats are still feeding input into the policy decision. This subject will have probably the biggest impact on the US in future decades. Unfortunately, that impact will be as great as the bankruptcy of Medicare and Social Security.

How many more of these wild–eyed liberal schemes can the country afford? The real solution is to get health care solutions back into the hands of the consumer. Most of the Democrats' plans do just the opposite. They take away personal choice and LIBERTY. And they place the decisions into the hands of bureaucrats in Washington DC.

Survival of our capitalistic Democracy is at stake. The receivers of government largess will soon exceed the taxpayers ability to give. For sure, they will outvote the workers who provide the funds. This is one of the major criteria for the failure of democracies. When those voting can take away the wealth of producers and give it to the non–producers, the minority of producers will be unable to stem the tide. Democracy will fail.

On that happy note, try to have a good week.

FEDERAL RESERVE ISSUES: John Makin gives us an interesting education on the Federal Reserve and the differences between fighting inflation and deflation.

CORPORATE TAX: Brilll tells us, even though he didn't say it directly, that the Laffer curve works for corporate tax rates as well.

It is so simple, yet so few truly understand the concept, including some Republicans in Congress. Dropping tax rates increases economic activity to such an extent that actual tax receipts go up.

Now, of course, you can't take this to the limit of zero tax rates because then tax receipts would go to zero, for sure. But it is just as true that taking the limit in the other direction, 100% tax rates takes the economy to zero and also takes tax receipts to zero.

This means there is a curve of tax receipts vs tax rates that starts at zero and ends at zero. In between, something else happens. The curve goes up, reaches a maximum and then starts heading back to zero. At what tax rate does the tax receipts maximize? Nobody knows. Like the human body, the economy is too complex for any genius or computer program to calculate.

That said, it is still true there is a curve and it is know as the Laffer curve named after an economist. And it starts at zero and ends at zero. This is a certainty.

So where are we on this curve. All the evidence points to the proposition that we can lower tax rates and achieve higher tax receipts. It happened under Kennedy, Reagan and Bush II. And we are not at historical lows in terms of tax rates, so there must be room to move.

Several writers are suggesting that the best economic stimulus package would be a tax rate cut and in particular, a corporate tax rate cut. This article certainly amplifies that theory.

Have a great Sunday.

VIOLENCE–MIDDLE EAST–ISRAEL: Lot of articles today with several from each side of the question. Some are sympathetic to the Palestinians and some to the Israelis. The best in my opinion is by an Israeli writer, Caroline Glick.

ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION: Malkin tells us some things that we seldom see in the MSM.

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION ISSUES: See George Will's article on the history of this subject.

Have a great weekend.

ISRAEL–PALESTINIAN CONFLICT: Lot's of articles today. I highlight five, three conservative and two liberal. I thought Krauthammer had the best one. Most liberal articles sympathize with the Palestinians. Indeed, who would want to live under their circumstances. BUT, they voted for Hamas. And Hamas' goal is the elimination of Israel and all Jews. So unfortunate as it may be to be born in Gaza, it is the luck of the draw. Israel did all it could to give the Palestinians a chance by leaving Gaza along with all the infrastructure and opportunities for an economy, but the Palestinians destroyed it. Check out Rubin's last paragraph. Amplifies what Krauthammer has to say.

TERRORISM: Goldberg has some interesting views. Largely it revolves around Guiliani's idea of broken windows. If we begin to accept broken windows, or terrorist acts, then we have begun to lose the battle.

Have a great Friday.

HEALTH CARE: Best article of the day by George Will.

We have a number of stories on what 2009 will bring and in particular how Obama will handle it. I liked Blankley's article under PRESIDENT OBAMA.

CONGRESS: And Stossel titles his article Caroline Kennedy, but it really is asking the question as to what is the qualifications for a Senator. Not much apparently.

THE GLOBAL WARMING HOAX: The IBD has an interesting article, about sunspots, but what is really interesting is the foolishness of global warming proponents. Apparently, Columbus screwed up everything.

FREE ENTERPRISE AND SMALL GOVERNMENT: Two of the best articles of the day are provided by two of the best writers, Williams and Sowell. I highly recommend both as they give some real insight into people and government.

THE ECONOMY: You might want to sample the two articles listed here.

ISRAEL–PALESTINIAN CONFLICT: We have four articles today for your perusal, two on each side of the question.

Have a great NEW YEAR'S EVE.

I thought Schlafly's article under BIAS IN EDUCATION was the best of the day.

AMERICA: Paulson expresses some of my fears in his article today. The problem with the article is that he ends with a reliance that Americans can always recover from its stumbles and from threats to its existence. I surely hope so. We've recovered from the 1930's, from World War's, both numbered and cold, and we've recovered to a large extent from 9/11 even though the threat still exists. But there may come a time, a tipping point, when we have so socialized the country that its citizen dependents are a majority and will vote to further decimate the hard–working, wage–earning elements of society. Paulson doesn't tell us how to avoid this pitfall, a fall from which we may never recover.

HEALTH CARE DEBATE: I put Bookman's article on the Home Page, not because it is deserving in itself, but because one can make some strong points against universal health care by a careful reading.

Here are my points: Bookman has some real problems with logic in this article. He is trying to say that though he didn't want to spend a lot on his dog to keep it alive for a few more months, we don't have that luxury with humans. We do it all the time.

Tell me that the care of some famous person is not better than that of the common you and me. There is a limit to what each of us is willing to spend on health care. If you are rich and famous, you will search out the best health care professionals, world–wide. If you are somewhat better off than average, you might fly to another city for an operation, as I did. The operation was covered by Medicare but not the travel expenses.

Whether we like it or not, we cannot provide the health care afforded to the rich to all the population at the same quality.

So what to do? Bookman is trying to make an argument for universal health care, except rather than bringing health care up to the level of the rich, it will bring it down to the level of the poorest. Priorities will be set, maybe based on political connections. Wait times will be enormous. And personal liberty to make your own decisions on health care will be eliminated.

He finishes the article with this: "We're also still divided about whether health care ought to be a basic human right in this country. Personally, I think the case is settled. " The only problem with this statement is what is basic? Is basic, take two aspirin and call me in the morning? Or is it a team of best doctors from all over the country deciding on the latest treatments?

It can't be the latter because it is unaffordable to everyone. So like Communism, you can take it down to the level where everyone suffers or you can have liberty and capitalism where individuals decide how much they want to work and accumulate funds to have a better life. You can't have it both ways.

BAILOUT: If you want an accurate status of the US car industry and its problems, read the Richard Olivastro article. It is a really good summary.

FREE ENTERPRISE AND SMALL GOVERNMENT: The article by Paul Jacob expresses my ideas about the health of the US government precisely. We are in debt over our heads with little hope of getting out of debt under the new administration. Then again, Obama has surprised us with some of his appointments. So maybe there is hope. I don't have a lot of hope because we are beginning to be a dependent society, dependent on the government. That is one of the reasons democracy fails.

To see how far we have come read the liberal article under Health Care (NOT featured on the Home Page). The author argues that we should accept rationing of health care. On any grounds you want to argue, that is a bad idea. Grounds like practical experience in Canada and Great Britain. Grounds like experience with rationing gasoline in this country. Common sense that rationing never solved any major problem. Logic that not rewarding the supply side of the equation should result in any benefits but instead screws up the free–market system, a basically fundamental way human nature works.

Yet we have supposedly educated individuals trying to make arguments that rationing is the next thing we should consider. Indeed, if we have some form of universal health care, we must have rationing, but that doesn't say it is preferable. It is terrible.

We had free–market medicine when I was a young man. It worked fine. Only when the government got involved and started interfering did it become messy. And that started around the end of WWII when the government allowed businesses to deduct medical insurance for their employees without a recognized income benefit to those employees. LBJ's Medicare made things worse and through a long line of political initiatives including Bush's prescription medicine legislation, we find ourselves in a world of hurt. There is more than the universal health care "solution". We must go back to basic principles and think about ways free enterprise can solve this problem. It can be done and it will be much preferable to rationing.

Have a great Sunday.

Best article of the day:

THE ECONOMY: An article by Samuelson who basically is saying predictions are pretty worthless. Who would have expected what we experienced in 2008?

Have a great Saturday.

Too much eggnog? Maybe that is what happened to the opinion writers of the day. I only found one new article worthy of being placed on the Home Page.

THE ECONOMY: The Heritage Foundation's Ronald Utt tells us that infrastructure spending is not likely to reverse the slowdown. Using examples from the 1930's and from Japan, he shows that these techniques might be beneficial in the long term, but will have little or no effect in the short–term.

Have a great Friday.

REGULATION: The best article of the day, or maybe quite a while, is found under this Subject. It talks about how government regulation is killing Silicon Valley, our golden goose. Entrepreneurs are simply scared to take the risks that they previously did. I live in Silicon Valley, started my own company, along with 7 others, which achieved some degree of success. I don't even want to be on a corporate public board anymore. Why risk the modest amounts that I have accumulated?

Other interesting stories can be found under ECONOMY and TERROR and I've included an interview with Sarah Palin, who I think will continue to make news in the future.

MERRY CHRISTMAS to all.

CHRISTMAS: A number of articles today under this Subject; I think maybe the best is by Newt. The rest, I didn't find any that were terribly awe–inspiring. But have a Merry Christmas anyway.

NEW YORK POLITICS: Caroline gets a lot of attention in the Senatorial crap game. Most of the comments are along party lines with liberal commentators generally saying she is as qualified as the next person. Morris is not so sure.

RICH VS POOR: Obama is promoting the middle–class. The IBD takes some interesting shots at this approach. But to broaden the discussion, how can the government help one "class" without hurting the others? With the government, it is mostly a zero–sum game. It takes money from some and gives it to others. The only way that government actions can actually produce more is by getting out of the way. Lowering taxes, reducing regulations. Then everybody wins. But this is not the idea that Obama has in mind, I don't think.

THE GLOBAL WARMING HOAX: Several articles are posted today on this Subject. All of these point to proof of the hoax. The globe is cooling and has been for the last decade. One writer asks how long does it have to cool before the "warmers" give up. They probably won't give up. They will just slide into obscurity. The problem is that we don't hold writers accountable when they are wrong. They just go on to the next "crisis". I remember all the commentators who said oil would never never get back to $100 a barrel. Don't look now, but since it is trending down, some writers even think it might get to $20 a barrel.

Just when the common perception is some "fact", the world whips around and makes all the forecasters into fools.

THE ECONOMY: Lambro tries to make us feel good about the country and the economy in light of the current darkness. :) Generally, I support his thoughts but do we ever come to a tipping point where the socializing and debt–incurring nature of our government finally tips to disaster? I've always been of the opinion that we Americans can ride through a slow–down and come out the other side just fine. Look at the S&P 500 over the last 80 years Bad times are evident, but always the upward growth returns and you can pretty much draw a straight line through the trend. The bubbles pop up above this line and the down–turns slip below. But the trend is the master. Or it has always been in the past.

Somehow over the years we have survived massive government expenditures in hot wars and wars on poverty, wars on drugs, and the like. Despite these expenditures, we always seem to land right–side up. I worry about today, though.

The country is bankrupt by any reasonable accounting technique. Our future obligations for Social Security and Medicare brings us to a negative net worth. That is usually defined as bankruptcy. On top of that, we have quasi–firm obligations to welfare programs throughout the country. Without a crisis, I can't imagine these being reduced, even though they make dependents out of potentially hard–working people.

On top of this pessimism is our new President, who we truly don't know. If he governs from the middle, we can survive. And some of his appointments look like the middle. But others do not. Take global warming for example. His appointments in this arena are scary. With a strong Democratic House and Senate, we might be liable for another huge financial obligation to solving the world's biggest non–problem. Today, we are spreading around $100's of billions, maybe trillions with little concern for the outcome. We are becoming numb to the numbers.

We must put this back into some reality. A trillion is $3000 for every man, woman and child in this country. For a family of four, $12,000. Or taking the total debt including the Social Security and Medicare obligations, we are talking in the $100,000's for every person.

The only solution is to cut back spending. We cannot tax more because higher tax rates hurt the economy and ultimately result in lower tax revenues.

I may not be around to see the above disaster, but my kids and grandkids surely could. We should get WORRIED, REALLY WORRIED.

THE ECONOMY: Stossel worries about some of the same issues. He explodes, once again, the idea of a planned economy.

CHARITY: It is funny to see a liberal berate their own, but Kristoff tells his cohorts that they have been real slackers when it comes to private giving. Of course, they are not reluctant to have the government steal the money from the rest of us and give it away, deserving or not.

Have a great Christmas Eve.

A number of good articles today listed below. My favorites are:

DEPRESSION: Sowell always explains things in a way that anybody can understand, the mark of a genius.

THE ECONOMY: Lambro is not an amateur either when it comes to explanations. He brings back history to show that stimulus packages do NOT help the economy. Thanks, Bush and Obama.

STATE BUDGET PROBLEMS: The IBD shows how California is in deep trouble because Democrats can't discipline themselves to quit spending.

TORT REFORM: Gryphon has the answer to this Subject, make the loser pay.

ETHICS IN POLITICS: We have a story today on Abe Lincoln claiming that he was not so much better than Blago. After all the "education" over the years, this one is hard to believe. But maybe so. I recommend reading it; then you decide.

FREE TRADE: The mostly liberal Economist explains in a substantial article why free trade is so important.

Have a great Tuesday.

HAPPY HOLIDAYS

BAILOUT: The main–stream–media are not willing to blame the unions for Detroit's mess, so conservatives have to. The Forbes article is a good one.

BUSH'S 2ND TERM: A Conservative attacks Bush.

KOSOVO: I've wanted for some time to do the research on the Balkans to write a decent analysis of the history and current situation. Kosovo is not the highest current Topic as things are pretty calm in the region compared to history. But to understand the Balkans is important in understanding the birthplace of many conflicts. What is truly interesting about today's article is that it shows Muslims can peacefully live with other religions. I recommend reading for background.

Have a great Sunday.

ECONOMICS: Lots of excellent articles on this general Topic, with articles on HOUSING, BAILOUT,THE INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL CRISES and GAS PRICES. The IBD in particular educates us on how Housing initiatives by the government were really the cause of the breakdown. And how many times did we hear only a few months ago that oil would never go below $100 a barrel. Gainor reminds us of some of the silliest statements by the media.

WAR ON TERRORISM–AFGHANISTAN: The Economist asks whether this is a winnable war. Certainly a legitimate question but a lot depends on political decisions made in the next year or so.

UNIONS: Barone has an interesting account of the rise of union power.

Have a great weekend.

Top article of the day, under BAILOUT, is by our Jack Tymann. They can cry all they want about management ineptness, but figure it out: Management is trying to maneuver around a labor contract that makes their job impossible. You might say that they shouldn't have entered into the labor agreement and sure that is true. But the circumstances were that the government was certainly not encouraging anyone at the corporate level on union issues AND the unions were playing the 3 major car companies off against one another. Before people start criticizing management too much (and they do deserve some criticism), they have to put themselves into managements shoes.

The unions pick a target to negotiate with, often the weaker one, and then the threat of a strike becomes overwhelming. The weaker one all of a sudden finds itself in a survival mode. If they don't agree, the other 2 will get all the business. That sure doesn't do the stockholders any favor. There is no defense against this strategy. You are dealing with 3 companies who can't collaborate against a monopoly union. That is not a fair fight.

The only solution is a new labor contract or a non–union shop. There is no other solution and as Jack points out, a bailout only prolongs the misery.

Speaking of solutions, here is another outlined in MEDICAL LAWSUITS. A big part of America's medical struggles can be blamed on the lawyers, and should be.

STATE BUDGET PROBLEMS: I don't usually put too much into the site on regional issues, but the CA budget deficit is similar to many other states. Devore tells us why we can't tax our way out of the hole.

And speaking of taxes, David Limbaugh in TAX CUTS tells us that Republicans have to go back to supply–side economics. It is the one that works and it is not Democrat lite. A powerful article.

And related to all those issues is an article under AMERICA by Herb London which should be required reading.

Have a great Friday.

SECRETARY OF EDUCATION: We have a good article on Obama's choice as well as a liberal one defending that choice.

US SUPPORT OF ISRAEL: Dick Morris has an interesting article on the likely conflict between Obama and a new government in Israel.

HEROES: If you want a feel–good article for this time of the year, read Tyrrell's article about troops in Afghanistan and how much more they are heroes than the athletes on which we place a lot of adulation.

WAGES: Schlaes has a great article on the problems with the UAW. It gives a lot of history from the 1930's about how we arrived at our present impasse with the unions.

Have a great Thursday.

I would recommend three articles in the ECONOMICS topic. Williams talks about the money supply. Fed Reserve issues are discussed by Kudlow. Two articles on the BAILOUT are noteworthy, one by Sowell and the other by Murchison.

Then on ETHICS IN POLITICS, we have a fine article by Stossel.

Have a great Wednesday.